Maritime Security (Jersey) Order 201-

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision
providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made 6 December 2013:

Decision Reference: MD-C-2013-0149
Decision Summary Title :	Maritime Security (Jersey) Order 201-, Article 31 Proposition		Date of Decision Summary:	5 December 2013
Decision Summary Author:	External Relations		Decision Summary: Public or Exempt? (State clauses from Code of Practice booklet)	Public
Type of Report: Oral or Written?	Written		Person Giving Oral Report:
Written Report Title :	Maritime Security (Jersey) Order 201-		Date of Written Report:	19 November 2013
Written Report Author:	Registrar of Shipping		Written Report : Public or Exempt? (State clauses from Code of Practice booklet)	Public
Subject: Maritime Security (Jersey) Order 201-
Decision(s): The Chief Minister decided – to lodge a Proposition to the States in accordance with Article 31 of the States of Jersey Law 2005, in order that the States may signify their views on the draft Maritime Security (Jersey) Order 201-, and subject to the Order being made, to request the United Kingdom government to extend to Jersey its ratification of – the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (Rome 1988) and the Protocol for Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Fixed Platforms Located on the Continental Shelf supplementary to the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (Rome 1988).
Reason(s) for Decision: Various provisions of the Aviation and Maritime Security Act 1990 were extended to Jersey by the Maritime Security (Jersey) Order 1996. A further Order in Council will replace the 1996 Order and provide for modifications consequential upon amending legislation made in the United Kingdom, as well as the Shipping (Jersey) Law 2002 and the States of Jersey Law 2005. Article 31(1) of the States of Jersey Law 2005 states that: Duty to refer certain matters to the States (1) Where it is proposed – … (b) that an Order in Council should be made extending to Jersey – (i) any provision of an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom … the Chief Minister shall lodge the proposal in order that the States may signify their views on it. Whilst extension of the Aviation and Maritime Security Act 1990 to the Island was previously in place, it is seen as acting in the spirit of the intention of Article 31 of the States of Jersey Law 2005 to also bring these further amendments to the States. Accordingly, it is proposed that the Chief Minister should lodge the attached Proposition so that the States may signify their views on the matter. Furthermore, the 1990 Act enabled the UK to ratify the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation 1988 and the associated Protocol concerning the Safety of Fixed Platforms. However, Jersey has not so far requested these instruments to be extended to the Bailiwick. It is therefore proposed that, once the new Order has been made, the Chief Minister shall request the United Kingdom government to extend to Jersey its ratification of – the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (Rome 1988) and the Protocol for Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Fixed Platforms Located on the Continental Shelf supplementary to the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (Rome 1988).
Resource Implications: There will be no additional manpower, revenue or capital requirements arising.
Action required: External Relations to inform the Greffier of the States of the Proposition to be lodged for debate as soon as possible.
Signature:		Position: Chief Minister
Date Signed:		Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed):

Signature (Quality Assurance)

Position

Director, International Affairs

Maritime Security (Jersey) Order 201-

PROPOSITION

THE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion −

to signify, pursuant to Article 31 of the States of Jersey Law 2005, whether they agree –

that a request be made to the Privy Council for the making of an Order in Council that would extend to Jersey, with appropriate modifications and adaptations, certain provisions of the Aviation and Maritime Security Act 1990 as summarised in the report of the Chief Minister dated 6th December 2013, and
that the British Overseas Territories Act 2002 (to which reference is made in the said Act of 1990) shall extend to Jersey, so as to be law in Jersey.

CHIEF MINISTER

Report

Summary

The proposed Maritime Security (Jersey) Order 201- is an Order in Council which is intended to update the current application to Jersey of certain Acts of the United Kingdom relating to maritime security, as a consequence of changes in the United Kingdom and Jersey legislation. These changes will also enable a related international convention and protocol to be extended to Jersey. In addition, it is intended for connected purposes to approve the application in Jersey of an Act of the United Kingdom relating to British overseas territories citizens.

Introduction

Article 31(1) of the States of Jersey Law 2005 requires the Chief Minister to lodge a Proposition when an Order in Council is to be made that will extend to Jersey provisions of an Act of the UK Parliament, so that the States may signify their views on it.

Various provisions of the Aviation and Maritime Security Act 1990 were extended to Jersey by the Maritime Security (Jersey) Order 1996. This further Order replaces the 1996 Order and provides for modifications consequential upon amending legislation made in the United Kingdom, as well as the coming into force in 2004 of the Shipping (Jersey) Law 2002 and the subsequent States of Jersey Law 2005.

Thus, whilst the extension of the Aviation and Maritime Security Act 1990 to the Island was previously in place, it is a requirement of Article 31 of the States of Jersey Law 2005 to bring these amendments also to the States.

Furthermore, the 1990 Act enabled the UK to ratify the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation 1988 and the associated Protocol concerning the Safety of Fixed Platforms. However, Jersey has not so far requested these instruments to be extended to the Bailiwick. It is therefore intended that, once the new Order in Council has been made, the Chief Minister shall request that the United Kingdom government’s ratification of the following Convention and Protocol be extended to Jersey:

the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (Rome 1988) and
the Protocol for Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Fixed Platforms Located on the Continental Shelf supplementary to the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (Rome 1988).

The Maritime Security (Jersey) Order 1996

The Order in Council that currently has effect in Jersey introduced new security powers from 1996. This was in part in the wake of the hijacking of the cruise ship Achille Lauro in 1985 by Palestinian terrorists. It was realised then that ships were potential prey. Security at ports and at sea needed tightening.

The effect of the Order in Council had been to create offences regarding the seizing of ships and fixed platforms at sea or endangering their safety. Crucially, it also introduced powers for the Jersey authorities to erect security fencing, to carry out searches of ships and searches within the harbour area.

The proposed new Order in Council and its effect in Jersey

The Aviation and Maritime Security Act 1990 has been amended in the United Kingdom, principally by the Merchant Shipping and Maritime Security Act 1997 and by the Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003.

The Merchant Shipping and Maritime Security Act 1997 made amendments to clarify and extend the meaning of a harbour area so that is was not just limited to the area under the control of the Harbour Authority, it allowed for another harbour operator to request the designation of a restricted zone and for security directions to be given to persons operating those harbour areas. These changes can be seen in the new section 20(2) and 22(1) of the Act, as it will be applied to Jersey by the draft Order in Council. The Minister for Economic Development will, as a result, be able to direct both the Harbour Master and more generally a harbour operator to organise searches.

The Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003 added section 36A. Whilst the 2003 Act did not contain a permissive extent provision, the draft Order in Council is able to make provision for a Jersey equivalent to section 36A. Accordingly the Minister for Economic Development will be empowered by Order to maintain a list of approved maritime security service providers as well as to ban inappropriate persons from providing that service. Provision will also be able to be made as to training and qualifications of those engaged in providing the security service.

Apart from these refinements, two Jersey enactments have been taken into account –

The Shipping (Jersey) Law 2002 repealed and replaced the Merchant Shipping Act of 1894 in its application to Jersey. This has meant replacing each reference to the 1894 Act with a reference to the 2002 Jersey Law.

The States of Jersey Law 2005 introduced the new political structure replacing the Committee system with a Ministerial one. This has meant replacing references to the now defunct Harbours and Airport Committee with references to the Minister for Economic Development.

In summary, the replacement of the Maritime Security (Jersey) Order 1996 addresses these four issues but leaves the effect of the remainder of the Order unchanged.

It should be said at this stage that the planned incorporation of Jersey Harbours and Jersey Airport into one corporate entity may necessitate further minor changes later in 2014 in that the new entity will act as the Harbour Authority. A number of references to the Harbour Master would thus be replaced by a reference to that body. This will be dealt with as part of the legal package concerning incorporation which will be presented to the States in due course.

The need for the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (Rome 1988) and Protocol on the Safety of Fixed Platforms

The proposed Maritime Security (Jersey) Order 201- makes full provision for the Convention and the Protocol. Amongst other powers, those provisions allow a party to the Convention to establish jurisdiction over persons in foreign flag vessels in territorial waters and to act against those persons if they commit terrorist offences such as seizing control of a ship or damaging navigational equipment or facilities.

For Jersey’s authority in these matters to be recognised and accepted by the international community, the Order in Council by itself is not sufficient. Extension of the United Kingdom’s ratification of the Convention and Protocol is necessary.

In 2005, new provisions have also been agreed internationally which extend the offences created to include the use and carriage of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons. The offences are also extended to capture corporate entities where they can be shown to be liable. As a first step to considering these new provisions, Jersey needs to have the original 1988 Convention and Protocol ratified on its behalf.

Additional to this point, following the International Monetary Fund (IMF) review of Jersey’s financial regulation in 2009, Jersey has committed to a further review by the Council of Europe Committee of Experts on the Evaluation of Anti-Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism (MONEYVAL). The review will assess the extent to which Jersey has in place effective systems to counter money laundering and terrorist financing and compliance with the relevant international standards in these fields. Such standards include the recommendations of the IMF review and recommendations of the inter-governmental body that aims to promote policies to combat money laundering and terrorist financing (Financial Action Task Force, known as FATF), including the Special Recommendations on Terrorist Financing. One of those recommendations is that Jersey should seek extension of the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation 1988 and its associated Protocol concerning the Safety of Fixed Platforms.

British Overseas Territories Act 2002

The Aviation and Maritime Security Act 1990, as it would be extended to Jersey by the proposed Maritime Security (Jersey) Order 201-, is defined as the 1990 Act as amended, inter alia, by the British Overseas Territories Act 2002. The British Overseas Territories Act 2002 provided for the renaming of dependent territories and British Dependent Territories citizenship as, respectively, British overseas territories and British overseas territories citizenship.

The significance of this amendment is that, when the proposed Maritime Security (Jersey) Order 201- extends section 17 of the 1990 Act, the original reference to “British Dependent Territories Citizen” now becomes a reference to “British overseas territories citizen”.

However, the British Overseas Territories Act 2002 has yet to be transmitted for registration in the Royal Court. Registration is necessary if that Act is to have proper effect in Jersey law. Consequently, so that the Aviation and Maritime Security Act 1990, as it would be extended to Jersey, is interpreted correctly to take account of the 2002 amendment, it is necessary for the British Overseas Territories Act 2002 also to be transmitted through the official channel to be registered by the Royal Court. This brings into play the procedure for reference to the States of Jersey under Article 31 of the States of Jersey Law 2005. Accordingly the States are asked to signify their views on the extension of the 2002 Act to Jersey.

Resources

Because these are amendments consequential on changes in other legislation they do not in themselves bring in any additional resource requirements.

Conclusion

It is important that the Island maintains the effectiveness of existing legislation by amending it when required.

Given the background of recommendations from the IMF and the value of Jersey achieving recognition by MONEYVAL and in accordance with Jersey’s commitment to the prevention of international terrorism, extension of the Convention and Protocol to the Island is also to be requested.

6th December 2013